Recently, the Supreme Court, in its order, remarked that the period undergone by the accused, who has been in custody for only four years and three months under a conviction under Section 302, IPC, could not alone justify the grant of bail.

The matter was heard before the division bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia

"We are conscious of the fact that the detailed judgment is not to be pronounced in a bail matter but some reflection of the mind of the Court is necessary, however brief it may be. That is completely absent", the Court observed while it set aside the HC judgment.

Case Brief- 

In the said matter, the accused has been in custody for only four years and three months in a conviction under Section 302, IPC.

The Court in its judgement has said that ''This ground itself could not form the basis of the bail order considering the period undergone.''

''We are conscious of the fact that the detailed judgment is not to be pronounced in a bail matter but some reflection of the mind of the Court is necessary, however brief it may be. That is completely absent''

In view of the aforesaid, we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter for consideration by the High court in accordance with the norms for grant of bail reflecting a brief reason why the bail is granted or rejected.

Case Title:- KUSHAL PAL SINGH vs State of UP 

Click Here to Download/Read the Full Judgement